Kumar Rajaram v. ITO (IT) (2019) 267 Taxman 65 / (2020)423 ITR 185 (Mad) (HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Payments made to charitable institutions and expenditure towards execution of property–Rightly allowed as deduction by the AO-Revision is held to be not valid. [S. 45, 48. 143(3)]

Property belonging to assessee’s deceased father was sold as per his father’s Will and an amount of sale consideration was paid to assessee. While computing amount of capital gain, assessee excluded certain payment made to a charitable institution and certain expenditure incurred for execution of sale of property such as professional fee, commission, etc. from total sale consideration. AO  accepted the income shown by the assessee. CIT invoked revision  jurisdiction  and directed the AO to disallow payments  and  re-compute total income. On appeal the Tribunal held that the assessee had submitted details including Will and testament executed by his father from which, it was seen that there was a specific direction to pay specific sum of money to charitable institutions, clear property tax arrears, payment of professional fee to Will executor, meet stamp duty expenses and remaining amount would be paid to assessee, thus, impugned payments were made as per Will of his father. Accordingly the AO was justified in accepting sale consideration declared by assessee and revision order was set aside. (AY. 2012-13)